Gone seem to be the days of good, lively debate. Recently there has been a ton of slapfighting between politicians, pundits, and the public. Labeling, over-generalizations, straw-man arguments and rhetoric are becoming so commonplace that people accept these counterproductive tactics as the rules of engagement. Likewise on the Vine, the most heated debates about the most controversial issues oftentimes slide down the path into name-calling, circular arguments, ad hominem attacks and other undesirable forms of debate.

We at Newsvine are hereby issuing a challenge to the Community: take part in a revival of substantive, healthy, intellectual debate - by engaging in and supporting Newsvine Next Level. Show your intellectual acumen by engaging your opponent on an even battlefield, with structured rules in place to ensure a focused, vigorous debate. Punches won't be pulled, but they'll land above the belt - and the goal is for there to be a clear winner. By doing this, in fact, we all win.

Here's how it will work:

• A topic is proposed (or is borne out of another thread on the Vine)
• People wishing to defend one side of the issue volunteer in the comment thread, by stating their position in one paragraph (200 words or less)
• Viewers vote for the entries and two debaters are selected
• Nominations for a third party mediator are taken and that person is selected
• The two parties square off on opposite sides of the topic, agreeing to abide by generally accepted standards of a structured debate
• A new article is published, summarizing the issue, introducing the participants and mediator
• Battle begins!

Our first debate topic is inspired by Newsviner Eric Larsen's Save The Poles project. Familiarize yourself here and here.

Topic: Conservation and Climate Change

Questions:

• Are we being scared into making unnecessary changes in our regular habits by the specter of global warming, and by the illusion that by doing so - we collectively stand to impact global climate?
• Are conservation efforts on a personal level effective in producing measurable, positive outcomes on a global scale?
• Should legislation be enacted that forces individuals and companies to comply with standards based on the thesis that humans are at the root of a potential global climate catastrophe?

If you are interested in participating, please submit your 1 paragraph position argument (limit 200 words) as a reply to the first comment below. Normally, we would have a second area for nominations for mediators. However, during this pilot debate, Tyler will be the mediator. All other comments, ideas, recommendations and criticisms are welcome!